Back to Spying

Spying Watch Continued

A recent poll indicates that only 56 percent of Americans value their privacy. A large number of people (42%) believe that the government should be allowed to spy on them without getting a court warrant. The remaining 2% are so braindead that they can't even figure out if they have an opinion. This makes me sick. As Benjamin Franklin once said: "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little safety will deserve neither and lose both." We are on the brink of losing civil liberties. Unless we speak up, we may lose the most important right of all - the right to privacy.

The Bush Administration has been spying on people. Without warrants. Which makes it ILLEGAL. It really is that simple.

Furthermore, Bush lied about it. On April 20, 2004, Bush made the following statement:

"Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so. It's important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution."

I ask you to assess whether or not this was a lie. It really is that simple. In an election year, Bush lied about whether his administration was spying on people.

There exists the significant potential that this abuse of power has resulted in violation of civil rights. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Bush has become corrupted by all the power at his fingertips -- so much so that he feels he can spy on Americans without getting even a simple (and still secret) warrant.

Making this debate even more critical, is the fact that in 1984, Alito wrote a memo proposing blanket protection (absolute immunity) from lawsuits when authorizing wiretaps. ''I do not question that the attorney general should have this immunity,'' Alito wrote. The Supreme Court eventually ruled against Alito's position -- that the attorney general and other high level executive officials could be sued for violating people's rights via domestic wiretaps -- even in cases of national security... This is called a SYSTEM OF CHECKS AND BALANCES. Alito is so ultraconservative that he opposes checks and balances of the executive branch by the judicial branch! If Alito had his way, the government could abuse its power - spy on you without any cause - and you would have no legal recourse.

I defy anyone to show that Bush -- by his actions -- actually values the Constitution and actually values the Bill of Rights. I, for one, consider them priceless and I exercise them every time I write a column for this blog.

-John Locke